Ram 1500 vs 5.3L Sierra

[Biga]

I say buy what you like. I like the Rams in interior better, both are good looking trucks in my opinion. MPG is not bad on my Ram with 3.21 gears. I get about 16 City and 21-22 Highway. Now If you put a level kit and 33's it will go down on either truck.

 

[highgear2005]

I looked at the Chevy, sharp looking truck, till you open the door! Just couldn’t get past that interior, looks dated. Perhaps they fix they rear end issue and transmission. That everyone I work with seem to have on the GM trucks. As far as my mileage I average 16-17 city highway combo. With my 5.7 3.92. I did notice different mileage from different gas stations. If I buy from my local sheets my mileage drops almost 4 mpg. I follow the 89 octane recommendation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cuppedup]

you will HATE the cylinder deactivation (AFM) on the Chevy/GMC trucks. At least with the RAM (MDS), you can turn it off.

About the same price for these trucks.
Sierra Elevation 4x4 5.3L DOUBLE CAB vs RAM 1500 Hemi CREW CAB 4x4 Night Edition.

But the Ram was about 38000 after all discounts and the SIERRA was 42,000 after all discounts

Ram dealers always seem to have room to move. Chevy dealer will not.

Got a CREW CAB loaded Big Horn for 4,000 LESS than the Sierra's DOUBLE CAB.

Cylinder deactivation? I’m assuming this is on freeways to improve mpg? Do you notice it? What are the downsides?

 

[MG99]

I’ve narrowed by truck choices down between the new ram 1500 big horn with the 5.7 or the Sierra elevation with the 5.3. I test drove the Sierra and loved it, and it seemed to get good mpg on the dash. I haven’t had the chance to drive the ram. I’m mainly concerned with mpg...it seems like the ram is all over the board with what I’ve seen for mpg which leads me to wanting the Sierra. I love the look of the Sierra more than the ram, but I like the rams interior better. I could get the ram for probably 10K cheaper too....how do these compare with mpg? I’ll be doing a small (2”) lift and 33” all terrain. What do you guys think ?

Drive the Ram and you’ll probably choose it over the Sierra. No other truck feels as good on the road plus you’ll be saving 10 grand!

 

[2wd]

I was pretty brand neutral - I favor buying what fits your needs for the best deal you can find.

In 2013 that happened to be an F150. In 2019 it was the Ram 1500. I really wanted to jump into Toyota because of the reliability reputation. However, it was very hard to get a deal on the Tundras. They are priced way too high trim for trim compared to the big 3 IMO (and dealers are less willing to deeply discount Tundras). I would have had to pay 5-6 thousand more for a Tundra with the same capability/options as the Ram. Even if I accept the fact that the Tundra is more reliable, the Ram is going to have to sink me for $5000 in repair bills before they would break even (and that also ignores the horrible MPG of the Tundra). That is not likely. Even my F150 that did give me some problems outside of warranty only set me back about $500. I love Toyota but many worship the reliability while ignoring the price. Everything has a cost. I'll gamble that the Ram is not going to hit me for 5K repair bills. If the Toyota's were priced competitively that's probably what I'd be driving right now.

For what it's worth I get 15-17 City and 20-24 Highway. That's right, I've gotten 24 MPG on 2 separate 200 mile trips up and down I95. The variance largely depends on the ultimate cruising speed. 60-70 is optimal. Start going north of 70 and MPG drops quickly. I have the 3.21 gearing and this thing is the best highway cruiser ever. Quiet, confident, safe (Ram and the F150 are the safest in the half ton segment). I'm no Mopar expert either but from my limited research this Hemi 5.7 that has been around since 2003 I think has most of the bugs worked out and is one of the more reliable V8 engines around.

 

[Nibis]

The thing I dont like the 5.3 is direct injection

 

[ddharris]

I traded my 2018 silverado on the 19 ram after one year of ownership. The seats were torture chambers. Sit for a while in the 19-20 Silverado/ sierra before purchase. I only did a short test drive with the chevy. Shame on me. 5.3 gave great gas mileage though.

 

[Grape_Ape]

At the end of the day buy whatever you like. I personally do not like the GM vehicles because everytime I've driven the 5.3 it's felt lethargic. The Hemi felt peppy like the 3.5 Ecoboost and that's what I narrowed my choices down to before finally going with the Ram.

Just for some anecdotal evidence on my MPG. I'm getting 15 mpg combined but tonight I did a straight highway run at 75mph most of the way and got 17 mpg. If I did 65mph I would absolutely be in the 18-20mpg range based on what I saw before I hit 75mph tonight. I may test a strict 65mph in the morning just to see but I like running 75 lol. I have the 3.92 gears. I use a lot of cruise control though.

 

[silver billet]

It's OK and expected to look at other trucks and think, "she's stunning!" I certainly love the looks of the new GM twins. There are so many cars and trucks on the road that I'd be happy to drive. But, I can only pick one. So I picked based on my priorities, cost being a huge factor (like you, I saved 10-12 K on the Ram vs a GMC SLE I was interested in).

The high points of the Ram are price, lots of great tech, interior looks and comfort (especially seats), the ride and handling (coil springs!), exterior looks good, and you can get great power out of the hemi (though it's too noisy for me to call it a great engine).

I really like my Ram. Doesn't mean I won't always look at the GM twins and appreciate their beauty. You can like more than one truck at once

 

[Willwork4truck]

I was pretty brand neutral - I favor buying what fits your needs for the best deal you can find.

In 2013 that happened to be an F150. In 2019 it was the Ram 1500. I really wanted to jump into Toyota because of the reliability reputation. However, it was very hard to get a deal on the Tundras. They are priced way too high trim for trim compared to the big 3 IMO (and dealers are less willing to deeply discount Tundras). I would have had to pay 5-6 thousand more for a Tundra with the same capability/options as the Ram. Even if I accept the fact that the Tundra is more reliable, the Ram is going to have to sink me for $5000 in repair bills before they would break even (and that also ignores the horrible MPG of the Tundra). That is not likely. Even my F150 that did give me some problems outside of warranty only set me back about $500. I love Toyota but many worship the reliability while ignoring the price. Everything has a cost. I'll gamble that the Ram is not going to hit me for 5K repair bills. If the Toyota's were priced competitively that's probably what I'd be driving right now.

For what it's worth I get 15-17 City and 20-24 Highway. That's right, I've gotten 24 MPG on 2 separate 200 mile trips up and down I95. The variance largely depends on the ultimate cruising speed. 60-70 is optimal. Start going north of 70 and MPG drops quickly. I have the 3.21 gearing and this thing is the best highway cruiser ever. Quiet, confident, safe (Ram and the F150 are the safest in the half ton segment). I'm no Mopar expert either but from my limited research this Hemi 5.7 that has been around since 2003 I think has most of the bugs worked out and is one of the more reliable V8 engines around.

x2. Buy the truck you feel most suits you at the time you need it, brands can really change over time/redesigns.

Just before 2015 I wasn’t too interest in a Ferd due to the v8 cam phaser problems that they never seemed to get right. The 2015 redesign and the ecoboost 2.7 changed my mind. It worked fine for the time I had it (2 years) but it was an XLT (basically a Big Horn) so didn’t have a lot to go wrong. Now Ferd has the 7.3 gasser and in 21’ they are supposedly redesigning the interior (overdue) to compete with RAM. That could be a nice truck.

If you want to tow heavy with a “half-ton”, Ford tops the list with their “Max Tow” or h.d. payload and raw power from either the 3.5 ecoboost or the 7.3.
Our hemi needs a power boost and a gear set change (add back the 3.55 please) so owners don’t have to settle for 3.21/3.92 only. (I get that the ZF is a great transmission but the gearing spread sure seems big.)

We shopped hard on this purchase, I tried to get her into a Honda Pilot SUV or a GM pickup/SUV but she wanted the RAM for ride, interior and price. (At the time RAM was almost 10K below Ferd on a comparable high-end trim.)

Toyota’s do have a sound drivetrain, agree. Interiors are dated and low-tech compared to the RAM, no comparison IMHO.

 

[SpeedyV]

x2. Buy the truck you feel most suits you at the time you need it, brands can really change over time/redesigns.

Just before 2015 I wasn’t too interest in a Ferd due to the v8 cam phaser problems that they never seemed to get right. The 2015 redesign and the ecoboost 2.7 changed my mind. It worked fine for the time I had it (2 years) but it was an XLT (basically a Big Horn) so didn’t have a lot to go wrong. Now Ferd has the 7.3 gasser and in 21’ they are supposedly redesigning the interior (overdue) to compete with RAM. That could be a nice truck.

If you want to tow heavy with a “half-ton”, Ford tops the list with their “Max Tow” or h.d. payload and raw power from either the 3.5 ecoboost or the 7.3.
Our hemi needs a power boost and a gear set change (add back the 3.55 please) so owners don’t have to settle for 3.21/3.92 only. (I get that the ZF is a great transmission but the gearing spread sure seems big.)

We shopped hard on this purchase, I tried to get her into a Honda Pilot SUV or a GM pickup/SUV but she wanted the RAM for ride, interior and price. (At the time RAM was almost 10K below Ferd on a comparable high-end trim.)

Toyota’s do have a sound drivetrain, agree. Interiors are dated and low-tech compared to the RAM, no comparison IMHO.

Wait...I’m checking to see if you mistyped something: You implied the 7.3L is available in Ford’s “Max Tow” config., but I’m guessing that’s not correct. That would be...big.

 

[Grape_Ape]

Wait...I’m checking to see if you mistyped something: You implied the 7.3L is available in Ford’s “Max Tow” config., but I’m guessing that’s not correct. That would be...big.

I noticed that as well. 7.3 is only in the Super Duty which also offers the 6.2.

 

[Sir Ramcelot]

Having owned two previous Rams (2009 4x2 Laramie and 2014 4x4 Laramie Longhorn), I was partial to Ram when my current shopping experience started. I will have to say I have enjoyed reading the posts but I thought I would add my comments to this as I too am currently deciding between the Ram and the Sierra and my aspects are different than the OP because I'm looking at a different trim level.

Ram Limited: $71,555 MSRP (4x4, eTorque, Anti-Spin, 3.92, 33-gallon, Limited Level-1, Body-Color Group, Bed Utility Group, 22s, MFT, RamBox, DualPane, Trailer Brake)
Ram rebates: $1500 or 0.9/84mo or 0.0/72mo

Sierra AT4: $66,940 (4x4, 3.0L Duramax Diesel, AT4 CarbonPro Package, Technology Package, AT4 Premium Package, AT4 Preferred Package, Driver Alert I Package, Driver Alert II Package, Cargo Convenience Package, 20" Carbon Grey Wheels and Sunroof)

Sierra Denali: $72,235 (4x4, 3.0L Duramax Diesel, Denali CarbonPro which includes all AT4 packages, GMC Protection Package)

Looking at this I'm sure it seems like an odd comparison but here's how I arrived at these final two contenders. For Ram, I had to immediately rule out the EcoDiesel because it costs $3K more and with Diesel in the US averaging between 40-60 cents more per gallon than unleaded, I'll never break even. I did tons of analysis varying mileage, and increasing gas costs but it won't happen so absolutely zero point and that doesn't even take into account the additional maintenance (DEF, fuel filter changes, more expensive oil changes, etc.). That meant for Ram, I was going to go with the eTorque.

For GMC, it's a no brainer to choose the Duramax. The 5.3L felt underwhelming in the Sierra as I test drove the 5.3L, 6.2L and the 3.0 Duramax. The upgrade cost for the 6.2L V8 and the 3.0L Duramax is the same ($2,495 on the AT4) but the 6.2L has an EPA combined rating of 17 and requires premium gas whereas the 3.0L Duramax has an EPA combined rating of 24. Because the upgrade cost is the same, I'm saving gas immediately even at these low gas prices ($1.31 for unleaded here and $1.86 for diesel). The 6.2L and 3.0L Duramax both really move and the Duramax didn't have the turbo lag that the EcoDiesel had. The 6.2L was a touch faster off the line but not a huge difference at all.

The reason I didn't use a Denali is (I did test drive a Denali as well) because the Denali would cost $5,295 and the only difference is the adaptive ride suspension that the AT4 doesn't have, honeycomb chrome grill, chrome chin, chrome tow hooks (vs. red tow hooks on AT4), chrome window surround trim, power running boards and 22" wheels. That's it. I couldn't see spending that much more for just those differences. The AT4 gets you a factory 2" Lift, bigger tires, still get 20" wheels, offroad upgraded suspension, contrast brown stitching interior with Kalahari accents (brown) in the seats, etc.

As far as ride is compared, the Denali, AT4 and Ram with air suspension were all smooth trucks. I drove them on the highway, side streets, speed bumps, and honestly couldn't decipher a really noticeable difference as that is what I was concerned with in particular with the AT4. The CarbonPro is really nice because it's a carbon fiber bed that is indestructible and weights 60+lbs less increasing payload, towing and of course reducing weight so that should help with fuel economy.

Now for real world pricing. The best deal I have seen on a Limited is Koon's 15.5% off MSRP but within driving distance of me (500 miles or less) I've seen about 12.58%. That means a Limited stickering at $71,555 would cost me $62,555 BEFORE rebates or financing. AT4s are hard to find but I have a supplier pricing code that gurantees invoice right now if I wanted to pull the trigger at $62,365.11 BEFORE $7500 in rebates or 0.0/84mo. If I went rebates, the Ram would cost me $60,055 before TT&L and the AT4 would cost me $54,865.11 before TT&L. Obviously if I chose financing the AT4 would be a little over $30/mo cheaper as well and I wouldn't get rebates.

Comparisons: The Ram interior is absolutely better. The Sierra's is better IMO than Tundra, Ford and Titan but Ram is in a class by itself. The Ram would get me a better interior, RamBoxes, pano, 22s, 12” screen. The AT4 would get me a lift, heads-up display, way more cameras including bedview and rearview mirror, diesel, save gas, better looking on the outside, GMCs tailgate with soundsystem included in the tailgate, etc. As you can see, the list of equipment advantages of the Sierra AT4 exceed the Ram Limited but that interior and those ramboxes..haha. I've been following the problems plauging the Ram and I know forums always magnify the problems potentially but I was lucky in that my two Rams I owned (total of little over 130,000 miles) I never saw any issues. I don't know how reliabiltly is with GMC Sierra's. Anyway, I'll conclude my novel and comparison but I'm trying to decide as well.

 

[Reverendbiker]

I’ve narrowed by truck choices down between the new ram 1500 big horn with the 5.7 or the Sierra elevation with the 5.3. I test drove the Sierra and loved it, and it seemed to get good mpg on the dash. I haven’t had the chance to drive the ram. I’m mainly concerned with mpg.

I can only offer my own experience. I once owned a Silverado with the 5.3 and liked it well enough except that the transmission was crap and the fuel economy was horrible. According to my Fuelly data, my Hemi eTorque is getting about 10% better gas mileage than my Silverado did. Just one man's experience...

 

[Willwork4truck]

Wait...I’m checking to see if you mistyped something: You implied the 7.3L is available in Ford’s “Max Tow” config., but I’m guessing that’s not correct. That would be...big.

Oh, you are right, I was just remembering old info before the 7.3, and I didn’t note that the 7.3 gasser is only a super duty engine, not for the F150.
Yes that would be a stellar thing! Thanks for catching that!

 

[SpeedyV]

Having owned two previous Rams (2009 4x2 Laramie and 2014 4x4 Laramie Longhorn), I was partial to Ram when my current shopping experience started. I will have to say I have enjoyed reading the posts but I thought I would add my comments to this as I too am currently deciding between the Ram and the Sierra and my aspects are different than the OP because I'm looking at a different trim level.
71555 (1500 rebates)

Ram Limited: $71,555 MSRP (4x4, eTorque, Anti=Spin, 3.92, 33-gallon, Limited Level-1, Body-Color Group, Bed Utility Group, 22s, MFT, RamBox, DualPane, Trailer Brake)
Ram rebates: $1500 or 0.9/84mo or 0.0/72mo

Sierra AT4: $66,940 (4x4, 3.0L Duramax Diesel, AT4 CarbonPro Package, Technology Package, AT4 Premium Package, AT4 Preferred Package, Driver Alert I Package, Driver Alert II Package, Cargo Convenience Package, 20" Carbon Grey Wheels and Sunroof)

Sierra Denali: $72,235 (4x4, 3.0L Duramax Diesel, Denali CarbonPro which includes all AT4 packages, GMC Protection Package)

Looking at this I'm sure it seems like an odd comparison but here's how I arrived at these final two contenders. For Ram, I had to immediately rule out the EcoDiesel because it costs $3K more and with Diesel in the US averaging between 40-60 cents more per gallon than unleaded, I'll never break even. I did tons of analysis varying mileage, and increasing gas costs but it won't happen so absolutely zero point and that doesn't even take into account the additional maintenance (DEF, fuel filter changes, more expensive oil changes, etc.). That meant for Ram, I was going to go with the eTorque.

For GMC, it's a no brainer to choose the Duramax. The 5.3L is a dog in the Sierra as I test drove the 5.3L, 6.2L and the 3.0 Duramax. The upgrade cost for the 6.2L V8 and the 3.0L Duramax is the same ($2,495 on the AT4) but the 6.2L has an EPA combined rating of 17 and requires premium gas whereas the 3.0L Duramax has an EPA combined rating of 24. Because the upgrade cost is the same, I'm saving gas immediately even at these low gas prices ($1.31 for unleaded here and $1.86 for diesel). The 6.2L and 3.0L Duramax both really move and the Duramax didn't have the turbo lag that the EcoDiesel had. The 6.2L was a touch faster off the line but not a huge difference at all.

The reason I didn't use a Denali is this (I did test drive a Denali as well) is because the Denali would cost $5,295 and the only difference is the adaptive ride suspension that the AT4 doesn't have, honeycomb chrome grill, chrome chin, chrome tow hooks, chrome window surround trim, power running boards and 22" wheels. That's it. I couldn't see spending that much more for just those differences. The AT4 gets you a factory 2" Lift, bigger tires, still get 20" wheels, offroad upgraded suspension, contrast brown stitching interior with Kalahari accents (brown) in the seats, etc.

As far as ride is compared, the Denali, AT4 and Ram with air suspension were all smooth trucks. I drove them on the highway, side streets, speed bumps, and honestly couldn't decipher a really noticeable difference as that is what I was concerned with in particular with the AT4. The CarbonPro is really nice because it's a carbon fiber bed that is indestructible and weights 60+lbs less increasing payload, towing and of course reducing weight so that should help with fuel economy.

Now for real world pricing. The best deal I have seen on a Limited is Koon's 15.5% off MSRP but within driving distance of me (500 miles or less) I've seen about 12.58%. That means a Limited stickering at $71,555 would cost me $62,555 BEFORE rebates or financing. AT4s are hard to find but I have a supplier pricing code that gurantees invoice right now if I wanted to pull the trigger at $62,365.11 BEFORE $7500 in rebates or 0.0/84mo. If I went rebates, the Ram would cost me $60,055 before TT&L and the AT4 would cost me $54,865.11 before TT&L. Obviously if I chose financing the AT4 would be a little over $30/mo cheaper as well and I wouldn't get rebates.

Comparisons: The Ram interior is absolutely better. The Sierra's is better IMO than Tundra, Ford and Titan but Ram is in a class by itself.. The Ram would get me a better interior and RamBoxes. The AT4 would get me a lift, heads-up display, way more cameras including bedview and rearview mirror, diesel, save gas, better looking on the outside, GMCs tailgate with soundsystem included in the tailgate, etc. As you can see, the list of equipment advantages of the Sierra AT4 exceed the Ram Limited but that interior and those ramboxes..haha. I've been following the problems plauging the Ram and I know forums always magnify the problems potentially but I was lucky in that my two Rams I owned (total of little over 130,000 miles) I never saw any issues. I don't know how reliabiltly is with GMC Sierra's. Anyway, I'll conclude my novel and comparison but I'm trying to decide as well.

There are many other little differences in the Ram: panoramic sunroof, 12” screen, reclining and ventilated rear seats, etc. But don’t get me wrong; this is a really thoughtful comparison, and GM offers unique features (HUD) too. GMC has (finally) added adaptive cruise and has a nice trailering tech package. I’ve owned GMC and Chevy HD gassers in the past, and I liked their powertrains.

One question: Since you mentioned a lift, did you not want the Off-Road Group on the Ram? Or do you just prefer the 22s?

 

[Willwork4truck]

Having owned two previous Rams (2009 4x2 Laramie and 2014 4x4 Laramie Longhorn), I was partial to Ram when my current shopping experience started. I will have to say I have enjoyed reading the posts but I thought I would add my comments to this as I too am currently deciding between the Ram and the Sierra and my aspects are different than the OP because I'm looking at a different trim level.
71555 (1500 rebates)

Ram Limited: $71,555 MSRP (4x4, eTorque, Anti=Spin, 3.92, 33-gallon, Limited Level-1, Body-Color Group, Bed Utility Group, 22s, MFT, RamBox, DualPane, Trailer Brake)
Ram rebates: $1500 or 0.9/84mo or 0.0/72mo

Sierra AT4: $66,940 (4x4, 3.0L Duramax Diesel, AT4 CarbonPro Package, Technology Package, AT4 Premium Package, AT4 Preferred Package, Driver Alert I Package, Driver Alert II Package, Cargo Convenience Package, 20" Carbon Grey Wheels and Sunroof)

Sierra Denali: $72,235 (4x4, 3.0L Duramax Diesel, Denali CarbonPro which includes all AT4 packages, GMC Protection Package)

Looking at this I'm sure it seems like an odd comparison but here's how I arrived at these final two contenders. For Ram, I had to immediately rule out the EcoDiesel because it costs $3K more and with Diesel in the US averaging between 40-60 cents more per gallon than unleaded, I'll never break even. I did tons of analysis varying mileage, and increasing gas costs but it won't happen so absolutely zero point and that doesn't even take into account the additional maintenance (DEF, fuel filter changes, more expensive oil changes, etc.). That meant for Ram, I was going to go with the eTorque.

For GMC, it's a no brainer to choose the Duramax. The 5.3L is a dog in the Sierra as I test drove the 5.3L, 6.2L and the 3.0 Duramax. The upgrade cost for the 6.2L V8 and the 3.0L Duramax is the same ($2,495 on the AT4) but the 6.2L has an EPA combined rating of 17 and requires premium gas whereas the 3.0L Duramax has an EPA combined rating of 24. Because the upgrade cost is the same, I'm saving gas immediately even at these low gas prices ($1.31 for unleaded here and $1.86 for diesel). The 6.2L and 3.0L Duramax both really move and the Duramax didn't have the turbo lag that the EcoDiesel had. The 6.2L was a touch faster off the line but not a huge difference at all.

The reason I didn't use a Denali is this (I did test drive a Denali as well) is because the Denali would cost $5,295 and the only difference is the adaptive ride suspension that the AT4 doesn't have, honeycomb chrome grill, chrome chin, chrome tow hooks, chrome window surround trim, power running boards and 22" wheels. That's it. I couldn't see spending that much more for just those differences. The AT4 gets you a factory 2" Lift, bigger tires, still get 20" wheels, offroad upgraded suspension, contrast brown stitching interior with Kalahari accents (brown) in the seats, etc.

As far as ride is compared, the Denali, AT4 and Ram with air suspension were all smooth trucks. I drove them on the highway, side streets, speed bumps, and honestly couldn't decipher a really noticeable difference as that is what I was concerned with in particular with the AT4. The CarbonPro is really nice because it's a carbon fiber bed that is indestructible and weights 60+lbs less increasing payload, towing and of course reducing weight so that should help with fuel economy.

Now for real world pricing. The best deal I have seen on a Limited is Koon's 15.5% off MSRP but within driving distance of me (500 miles or less) I've seen about 12.58%. That means a Limited stickering at $71,555 would cost me $62,555 BEFORE rebates or financing. AT4s are hard to find but I have a supplier pricing code that gurantees invoice right now if I wanted to pull the trigger at $62,365.11 BEFORE $7500 in rebates or 0.0/84mo. If I went rebates, the Ram would cost me $60,055 before TT&L and the AT4 would cost me $54,865.11 before TT&L. Obviously if I chose financing the AT4 would be a little over $30/mo cheaper as well and I wouldn't get rebates.

Comparisons: The Ram interior is absolutely better. The Sierra's is better IMO than Tundra, Ford and Titan but Ram is in a class by itself.. The Ram would get me a better interior and RamBoxes. The AT4 would get me a lift, heads-up display, way more cameras including bedview and rearview mirror, diesel, save gas, better looking on the outside, GMCs tailgate with soundsystem included in the tailgate, etc. As you can see, the list of equipment advantages of the Sierra AT4 exceed the Ram Limited but that interior and those ramboxes..haha. I've been following the problems plauging the Ram and I know forums always magnify the problems potentially but I was lucky in that my two Rams I owned (total of little over 130,000 miles) I never saw any issues. I don't know how reliabiltly is with GMC Sierra's. Anyway, I'll conclude my novel and comparison but I'm trying to decide as well.

From what you’ve said and researched, I’d favor the AT4 for your needs.

 

[Sir Ramcelot]

There are many other little differences in the Ram: panoramic sunroof, 12” screen, reclining and ventilated rear seats, etc. But don’t get me wrong; this is a really thoughtful comparison, and GM offers unique features (HUD) too. GMC has (finally) added adaptive cruise and has a nice trailering tech package. I’ve owned GMC and Chevy HD gassers in the past, and I liked their powertrains.

One question: Since you mentioned a lift, did you not want the Off-Road Group on the Ram? Or do you just prefer the 22s?

Haha, ironically I wasn’t looking for a lift or offroad truck. I never lifted either of my other two as I had the stock coils in the 2009 and the air suspension on my 2014 longhorn. I was initially going to compare the Denali against the Limited but when I saw the AT4 I decided to check out the differences and unlike the Rebel, I was surprised you could option the AT4 with almost all the features/systems of the Denali (except adaptive ride control, 22s and power running boards) and for almost $6K less but you then get a 2” lift, offroad suspension (Racho shocks etc.) so it made going with a AT4 over a Denali an easy choice and the AT4 with the accents makes a little nicer interior than Denali.

I did go back and look at the Limited OffRoad pkg and since the AT4 comes with plates etc. it does make sense to add that so Ram price comes down some. The tires are bigger on the AT4 vs. the Limited OffRoad (60 vs. 55 profile and DuraTracs).

Decisions lol.

 

[Sir Ramcelot]

I’ve narrowed by truck choices down between the new ram 1500 big horn with the 5.7 or the Sierra elevation with the 5.3. I test drove the Sierra and loved it, and it seemed to get good mpg on the dash. I haven’t had the chance to drive the ram. I’m mainly concerned with mpg...it seems like the ram is all over the board with what I’ve seen for mpg which leads me to wanting the Sierra. I love the look of the Sierra more than the ram, but I like the rams interior better. I could get the ram for probably 10K cheaper too....how do these compare with mpg? I’ll be doing a small (2”) lift and 33” all terrain. What do you guys think ?

You can see my post in your thread as well. Have you looked at the AT4 since you get that lift and tires from the factory?

 

[Cuppedup]

You can see my post in your thread as well. Have you looked at the AT4 since you get that lift and tires from the factory?

If I went with the ram, 33” and a level/maybe 2” lift would be needed. If I went with the Sierra elevation, Id outfit it with the x31 to get true 4x4, and it comes with solid looking black rims and AT tires. If only get a level on that. The at4 cost over the elevation is a little more than I’d like to spend